Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News World's most dangerous terrorist ?

  1. May 16, 2005 #1
    I used to think the answer to this was Bin Laden, but after reading an article called "The Brain" (playboy's june issue), I switched my opinion to Khalid Shieikh Mohammed. Does anyone else agree with me? This guy was the mastermind behind so many terrorist attacks (incl. 9/11) that it made my head spin. It was also surprising to read that he received his bachelor's degree here in the States, with classmates describing him as a "class clown". Simply crazy, and scary when you think about it.

    Thoughts or opinions?

  2. jcsd
  3. May 16, 2005 #2


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I know some guy who was a class clown in high school.... i think we should kill him just to be safe ;). I still think Bin Laden is ... well hes dangerous... but not necessarily a threat. I heard about him well before 9/11 and his list of terrorist acts was just mind-boggling. I dont think hes a threat though because of his health issues.
  4. May 16, 2005 #3


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I didn't catch that issue. (So it's true, there are articles and not just pictures?)
  5. May 16, 2005 #4


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I guess its really a matter of perspective, since they are leaders of the same organization.
  6. May 16, 2005 #5
    he has more H-bombs under his control then any other person

    he has more other WMDs
    and delivery systems
    and followers

    he belives GOD is on his side

    he has killed over 100 people before he started the two most resent wars
    directly killing thousands more people thru his actions
    has no real plan to stop the killing
    maybe planning other wars right NOW [iran , syria, NK , others??]

    state terror is still terror
    what is an H-bomb other then a terror device??
  7. May 16, 2005 #6


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Wow that was a horrible post. Might as well call clinton, reagen, carter, jfk, ford, etc. the worst terrorists in the world because they had thermonuclear weapons under their control.
  8. May 16, 2005 #7
    nothing but disinformation for naive american masses.
  9. May 16, 2005 #8


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Yah, i dont know where ray_b gets his rant from. Sounds like hes as uninformed as the Europeans who get their facts from fahrenheit 9/11.
  10. May 18, 2005 #9
    what facts?
    do you dispute?

    "W" had over 100 people killed when he was gov of texas FACT
    capital punnishment or a form of state terror call it what you will
    the people are still dead
    and "W" ordered the deaths

    he has started a war in IRAQ that had no rational reason
    no WMDs
    no connection to 9-11 or any other terror threat
    his intent to start other wars is widely reported

    what fact do you think is false??
  11. May 18, 2005 #10


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I count seven in between there. :rolleyes:
  12. May 18, 2005 #11
    It's not just Bush. National leaders had always been the most inflluential people who have a great military might and millions of brain washed masses ready to do their wishes. Some have more guilts than others, but at the end of the day, they are all guilty of something.

    Most dangerous terroists in my opinion would be some computer nerd who can hack our national defense system and use our own WMD's and deilivery system against us.
  13. May 18, 2005 #12
    what are you talking about ?
  14. May 18, 2005 #13
    I think I have to jump on the "Carter" bandwagon, and label him as the World's most dangerous terrorist. While we all think he's just farting around in developing Democracies, insuring "legitimacy" of the elections, I have reason to believe that he's really installing explosives, poisons, radioactive substances and pathogenic microbes into every election booth he sees, so that one day, when Democracy has spread to enough places and voter turnout is high enough, that maniacal bastard can kill hundreds of thousands of people all at once.
  15. May 30, 2005 #14
    The most dangerous is the one the people will follow.

    I am not doubting that whoever is behind the planning is dangerous. However, if you plan something you need peole to carry it out. This is why Osama is dangerous. He can lead people to take thier own lives for a cause, that's dangerous. If Someone makes a plan but can not get someone to carry it out, what good is the plan? How many people will disappear without someone to lead the recruitment process? It took years for 9/11 to be planned out. If the C.I.A. and the F.B.I. were working with each other instead of being rivals, 9/11 would have never happend. So what good is it to plan something that can easy be stopped if two forms of government learn to work together? (which hopefully they will.) NOw you take Osama, and that guy can say," Hey, I may not have a plan, but I got plenty of people, and I got more where they came from." So in essence the person who can get more people to die for him is more powerful and more dangerous. The reason is America will keep messing up and people will join Osama. Look at that Newsweek story. Look at those photo's of that jail in Iraq were a woman held a prisioner with a dog lesh. If these things didn't happen people would have had second thought about dying for some dude's cause. I mean there are moderate Muslims who don't want to go back living life like it was in the 9th century. There are Muslims who are like , " and what's the reason I should hide in a cave sharing space with Scorpions ?" So yeah, you can have the best plans and carry then out, but without the people, your not going to get far. Osama, he's got the money, the dues paid in the Afganistain wars agaist the Soviets and the Speeches. Sure One day he'll get caught, but it depends on how hmany people he has gotten into that Organization of his, before he does. Then we have to stop messing up. I mean I hate to think what could be worst than flushing a muslim holy book down the toliet, wieither it's true or not. This doesn't mean I want to see someoen one up that stunt. It just means just when you thought our image could not get any worst, some hack news magazine has to tell lies and say it's the truth. As long as we keep messing up, they will get more die hard's. If we can stop messing up, and catch Osama and the dude that makes all the plans, then we will get ahead on this war...That is If.
  16. May 31, 2005 #15
    that is the most misguided post i have ever read.

    The US did not start the war, the US is finishing what was started by terrorists.

    and iran and NK need to be stopped from having nukes, especially iran. iran is a theocratic, rogue state, and should never be allowed to have nuclear weapons.

    And the war on terrorism is not a terroristic act!
    we have yet to use a H-bomb, i hope you knew that!
    Does the US not have the right to defend itself?!
    If someone punched you, would you run to the UN for help, or would you stand up for yourself?!

    you need to think for yourself, not do what others tell you is right.
  17. May 31, 2005 #16
    do i get 100 dollars if you have ever read a tom clancy book, seen a tom clancy movie, or played a tom clancy video game?
  18. Jun 2, 2005 #17
    (0_o) anyway
    that single sentance provoked me to not even read the rest of your post, because thats a royal load of crap there...

    i mean sure the CIA FBI and NSA arent buddy buddy, but they do combine data and have mutual analysts take care of it, the real problem is between our intelligence agencies, and all of the military, and coordinating that information to the executive branch, which was why 9/11 happened so easily, i think everyone ignores that many senators canceled there 9/11 flights because of a security briefing, which our president and much of his cabinet failed to attend

    but anyway

    i wouldnt say "W" is a terrorist, sure hes a dangerous man, but even though i dont like him or his policies, i will say hes smart enough not to just crap around with his power, that when he uses it, he at least doesnt randomly use it, i dont think anyone can say iraq was a peaceful nation and that its leaders should not have of been ousted from power...

    and to me it sounds as if you have no idea about NK syria or Iran, as the guy with alot of numbers in his SN said, iran is a theocratic leadership led by i believe, ayatollah khameini(or is it khomeini, i mix them up alot) which considers the US the "Great Satan"...and considering Syria has a wide reputation for harboring...well every terrorist who comes knocking at there doors...and NK, well the man is psychotic...if you read his profile youll drop a load in your pants....the man uses severe cult of personality, and kidnapped a cook from italy just to teach his chefs how to cook pizza, of which he installed a 100k+$ kitchen to make his pizza, and spends over 70% of his countries funding on military, meanwhile theres been about a 10 year famine going on

    also does this have to be a current most dangerous or can we include ones throughout history...because polpot and milosevich come to mind then...
  19. Jun 2, 2005 #18


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Do you have a source for that? I think you are mistaken.
  20. Jun 3, 2005 #19
    cnn.com - search there news reports they had one on it around that time

    also go to any of the intelligence websites and look at there news reports, they have briefings usualy monthly, and during times of stress weekly
  21. Jun 3, 2005 #20
    good post pap.
    hmm i wonder who has more people willing to die for their cause...binladen, the chinese or the americans.

    and doesn't america have nucs?

    "And the war on terrorism is not a terroristic act!" That is a perspective...are you not terrorizing the countries in their eyes? You think whats best for them but do you actually have to live throuhg it?

    "we have yet to use a H-bomb"..."Does the US not have the right to defend itself?!"
    hmmm sounds a bit one sided so americans are allowed to develop weapons for defence but does not allow others to do the same...or rather the americans look at those weapons as acts of terrorism or a threat. Whilst looking at it from the other side, why can't we build weapons to match the americans, americans are threating to take over the world so we must defend ourselves. Basically america needs to be on top of the world in arsenal.

    Its great to see an american bashing american weapons...gj rayb
  22. Jun 4, 2005 #21
    Don't believe everything Bush tells you.
  23. Jun 5, 2005 #22

    but yes if we perhaps would have a SALT treaty with the world, that would be efficient, or perhaps not let theocratic and one party dominated countries have them would be nice, because i havent seen a good one party rule since good ole josip
  24. Jun 5, 2005 #23


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    That's not good enough. That's a pretty serious charge you make and it really requires substantiation.
  25. Jun 6, 2005 #24


    User Avatar

    What acts of terrorism did Iraq perform in the USA

    Why should the US maintain chemical, biological and nucleur weapons whilst calling it terrorism when others try to attain them?

    It is if you are one of the terrorised civilians watching US bombs rain down on you

    I doubt the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki really knew or cared about the subtle difference between fission and fusion

    Of course but apart from a couple of isolated terrorist attrocities when has it actually been attacked?. Does this right of defence not extend to other countries such as Iraq which has been invaded. Do the Iraqi people not have a right to try to expel the invaders without being labelled terrorists?

    The USA uses the UN as an 'a la carte menu', when it suits them it's rulings are above question when it doesn't it ignores them

    Exactly how many countries feel when America tells them how they should be structured, governed, behave etc..
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 6, 2005
  26. Jun 6, 2005 #25
    well im sorry but its not my job to educate you

    i think thats the point, we havent been attacked, because we are doing this preemptive stuff and because of our massive military
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook